SwitchAds

The Tiki Web Group

Please like MCS on Facebook

Disclaimer: Unless specifically mentioned in the post, we have no clue where this picture came from. Know where it came from? Post the link in the comments, and reap the glory! All comments are the sole possesion of the commenters and do not reflect the opinions or values of MCS.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

And as for apologizing for being human part – that would be a liberal thing; sorry for the actions of our ancestors, sorry for misusing our natural resources because we didn’t know any better in the past, sorry that a big juicy steak tastes better than tofu salad, sorry I feel I need to keep a gun so I can defend my family, sorry the people of California voted against gay marriage and your feelings got hurt. . .

@DasMaus: lol wat. that word “liberal” means something other then what you think it means I think. I’m liberal. I own a ak-47 and enjoy shooting things with it. I hate tofu with a passion.

but..

I’d like to keep bigotry out of my state’s constitution thank you very much, and I’d rather we use our natural resources with our brains and not our massive cocks.

and also: you’re correct when you say “trust scientists, they’ve never been wrong” if only because they generally never come out with off the wall absolutely and thrive in an environment in which other scientists are trying to prove them wrong.

@deuce & Ben1605: I have a friend who’s an agnostic, and we argue about this all the time. He says we can never know, even though he doesn’t believe in any gods. I say that we can never know if a small invisible fairy is floating behind our heads our entire lives just out of reach, but it’s pretty reasonable to assume not.

Atheists don’t know where all this came from (or if there ever was a beginning if you believe in cyclical time present in infinity), but at least we’re confident there are no monsters under our bed.

@DasMaus:
At least Scientists admit when they’re wrong and edit previous theories to make them more right. The christian God, on the other hand, is infallible and everything he’s ever said has been right. Including supporting slavery, a flat Earth, and for anyone that’s actually read the bible, multiple versions of Satan that have nothing to do with each other.

@DasMaus:
Isn’t science itself a form of control just like religion masked by intentional deception? It would be true to say that 100% of the people on this planet follow either religion or science would it not? What makes science so different from a religion such as Christianity? Everybody follows one of the other based on their own beliefs.

It is a set of instructions for logically understanding the world around you. In of it self, Science says nothing about the world at all. It’s just a method of understanding the world, based on proof, evidence, and all that other gibberish that ! Belief lacks. Because belief requires you to ! believe even when faced with contradiction.

@tiki god: mini-rant. I think you feel towards Christians the same way I feel towards anit-gunners, tree-huggers (I care about the envrionment but I’m for its responsible management of its resources not its worship), animal rights wackos (treat them humanely but not like theyre people), etc.

@Namelis1:
Who’s to say that the “set of instructions” are logical and right? We believe it to be so because we were taught it but many people in the world are taught that God is real. Not saying he is or isn’t but I’m trying to point out that to me, science itself seems like its own religion.

@LukeV1-5: By “condone” he’s probably referring to the wall of silence, stonewalling, legal defense funds, hush money, public denouncing yet private complicity and tacit approval due to lack of punishment that has been the Catholic Church’s attitude towards the thousands of molestation cases that have arisen in the last few decades.
But hey, you keep defending that church of yours.

Oh, and Paul, nowhere in the Bible does it mention a Flat Earth. The closest it comes is in the Book of Isaiah where it is described using the Hebrew word for circle. (chuwg) The belief that ancient man thought the Earth was flat was a myth put forward in the 19th Century. While early cultures did hypothesize about a flat earth, by the about the 3rd Century BC the general educated view was one of a spherical Earth.

@Namelis1
I don’t think one was comparing science and religion in that sense. What he meant, is that when a bunch of scientists come up to you, and say, “look we’re building this huge machine, to see if we can produce some particles, which nobody is even sure exist” – you most likely believe them.
I doubt that every time stuff like that happens, you go into your backyard and try to build your own hadron collider to see if it’s true.
The same way you trust those scientists ‘blindly’ – most religious people trust their pastors.

But of course, it’s ridiculous to assume that people who believe scientists are *just* as gullible as religious folk.

@dieAntagonista: True, I can’t build a particle accelerator and verify the results, because neither do I have the expertise to do so, nor the resources. I can however assume that we will be getting a steady trickle of advanced technology based on that research.

Unlike the priests, where the only thing that trickles down is their into little kids. Sure I know that’s just a few cases, but I really enjoy that stereotype (ZING).

The LHC and a few other experiments are outside the abilities for a regular person to replicate, but there are a lot of experiments that can be done. Regarding the picture, astronomy is one of the fields where amateurs can and do contribute significant research. Especially with digital cameras and computers, anyone can put together a telescope and measure things like parallax and red shift. I’ve even seen amateur set-ups for radio telescopes (the trick is that you have to far away from local transmissions). Even a homemade fusion reactor or STM are perfectly doing able. Personally, I got a big jump in my scientific career by baking superconducting ceramics in a pottery kiln and building a plasma drive from an old monitor power supply. So complain all you want about blindly trusting scientists, but its you own lazy fault that you can’t verify the results yourself.

@reboot: Haha, whoa, what’s your problem man.
Not everybody can be a scientist, are you gonna hold that against me?
I wasn’t complaining, I just stated an observation. It’s not about, being able or not, but it’s ridiculous to expect everybody to verify for themselves, every project that scientists are currently working on. Don’t you agree?

If your doctor tells you after an examination that you’ve got cancer, are you gonna study medicine after that?

Also, you seem to be ridiculously angry at me. I don’t like what Dawkins does, and that’s my opinion.
I know there’s not much to be gained from religion, and it’s not comparable to what science has done for humanity.
Scientists are the closest to being some kind of gods, out of all delusions and non delusions people have. So. Stop jumping on everything I say, or whatever else it is that you’re doing.
You’re a determinist like me, I consider you a friend just because of that. Don’t you know I have no choice in not liking Dawkins?

@dieAntagonista: That wasn’t particularly directed at you, but at the idea that science is just a “set of beliefs” or that people blindly trust science the same way that they trust religion.
But, yeah, everyone can be a scientist! That’s the really great thing about it. You can’t replicate every experiment ever done, but its entirely feasible to replicate the most fundamental ones.

@RSIxidor: I do detect the sarcasm, but being a minister doesn’t prove religion. If anyone could walk on water or rise from the dead or part the Red Sea, then you might be able to compare science with religion.

@reboot:
“Clairvius Narcisse. He was a Haitian guy who was declared dead by two doctors and buried in 1962. They found him wandering around the village 18 years later. It turned out the local voodoo priests had been using naturally occurring chemicals to basically zombify people and putting them to work on the sugar plantations.”

I dunno some guys get really pissed off when a hypothesis is shot down. Have you seen the debate on global warming? In discover magazine a few years back a guy came up with a pure mathematical explanation that that global warming was more or less a product of nature and was not out of the ordinary. Well he was more or less kicked out of the “Scientific Community” and began regularly receiving death threats from the Opposing side.

Long story short it is absolutely childish to think that the study of science is objective. And it is even more dumb to assume that a scientist who had devoted his whole life to learning about and proving a hypothesis/theory would be anything but welcoming of contradictory evidence. People never have and never will work that way.

Agnosticism I would call the edge of the coin. The parallel I drew does make sense, look at the macro again. “I’d rather trust in …” Isn’t that putting *faith* in something? And look at the fervour with which atheists flock together and engage in proclaiming their dis-belief in God. Seems to me the religious impulse isn’t so easily lost in humans.

I wasn’t saying that Satanism = Atheism, I was saying that they’re both rebellions against the same thing, which provokes an amusing observation – true disavowal of something produces disengagement and finding a new way, not a perverse reflection of that system.

Did I miss anything? Let’s see… taking weakest part of any argument and attacking that instead of debate. Okay. Some reasonable discourse. Huh. People commenting just to say that won’t comment. Good. That seems like a normal one of these threads. Now to comment in the next one and see where that one takes us.

I think there was a picture on this site that tiki put up that said something like this.

Creationism: In the beginning higher being who knows everything created us.

Big Bang Theory: In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

As far as overdressing, only Presbyterians do that I think. And apologizing for being human, I’m pretty sure you’re automatically forgiven, you just need to admit you’re wrong to someone to keep you accountable.

What I don’t understand is why can’t everybody just get along? Isn’t calling christians ignorant or telling atheists they’re going to hell really just another form of prejudice?

Scientific truth differs from religious/revelation truth precisely because scientific truth is verifiable by anyone should they want to. Repeatable and verifiable testing is the guard of truth for science.

I have this deep and dark urge to appologise about being a human every day. Christianity is the perfect religeon because they help me feel more and more bad about my horrid and dirty human-ness on a daily basis. Islam cannot even come close to reminding me how awful everything about me is (though I am a man so I can’t be categorically sure about this). Every thought and desire of mine is filthy and base. No matter how much I appologise for all of this, I never feel like I am absolved of this until fellow christians help me to understand that I am far more depraved and vulgar than I orginally thought. It really is the perfect religeon. You ought to try it.